- This topic has 25,907 replies, 115 voices, and was last updated 15 hours, 28 minutes ago by
.
- Posts
Hi MB,
Still looking for others to DISPROVE YOUR THEORY?The scriptures you offer are about the WORD, not the man from Nazareth.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 22 2012,14:05) Quote (942767 @ April 21 2012,19:58) A person is defined by the life that he lives.
Marty,Do you or do you not agree that “the Word of God” in Rev 19:13 is Jesus?
Hi Mike:I believe that the person on the horse described as faithful and true and the person that the scripture states that “his name is called the Word of God” is Jesus.
Love in Christ,
MartyHi MB,
Does it empower you to say all others speak nonsense and play games and only you are sensible?Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 22 2012,12:50) Hi MB,
Still looking for others to DISPROVE YOUR THEORY?The scriptures you offer are about the WORD, not the man from Nazareth.
Nope, just still noticing how not one of you guys is able to post a SINGLE SCRIPTURE that explains that when Jesus said, “I came down from heaven”, it doesn't mean that Jesus himself came down from heaven.NOT ONE SINGLE VERSE that prohibits Jesus from pre-existing, Nick? When I've offered FIFTY of them to you? Hmmmmm…………
So what do you do? You say those verses are about “the Word who was God” instead of about Jesus. But I've showed you that your understanding insists upon this “Word who was God” coming to do, not his own will, but God's. It insists upon this “Word who was God” being one witness of himself, while the “God” was his second witness. It insists upon this “Word who was God” being God's Son BEFORE he ever became flesh. It insists upon changing scriptures like John 1:14, making that verse say the Word came to be IN someone who was flesh instead of what it really says: “the Word BECAME flesh”.
That's just too much already Nick. And I've barely scratched the surface of all the scriptures that won't work with your faulty understanding. Like when Jesus speaks about his own word, what does that mean? Does the word of God have a word of its own? Or how can the “Son of Man” ascend to where HE was before, unless the “Word that was God” was already “the Son of Man” before he descended?
So you keep on posting your unscriptural drivel, and I'll keep on believing my Lord when HE says that HE came down from heaven.
Hi MB,
You may feel quite satisfied in your understanding but you are yet wrong because you think the man spoke for himself.
jn 7.16Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 23 2012,06:13) Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 22 2012,12:50) Hi MB,
Still looking for others to DISPROVE YOUR THEORY?The scriptures you offer are about the WORD, not the man from Nazareth.
Nope, just still noticing how not one of you guys is able to post a SINGLE SCRIPTURE that explains that when Jesus said, “I came down from heaven”, it doesn't mean that Jesus himself came down from heaven.NOT ONE SINGLE VERSE that prohibits Jesus from pre-existing, Nick? When I've offered FIFTY of them to you? Hmmmmm…………
So what do you do? You say those verses are about “the Word who was God” instead of about Jesus. But I've showed you that your understanding insists upon this “Word who was God” coming to do, not his own will, but God's. It insists upon this “Word who was God” being one witness of himself, while the “God” was his second witness. It insists upon this “Word who was God” being God's Son BEFORE he ever became flesh. It insists upon changing scriptures like John 1:14, making that verse say the Word came to be IN someone who was flesh instead of what it really says: “the Word BECAME flesh”.
That's just too much already Nick. And I've barely scratched the surface of all the scriptures that won't work with your faulty understanding. Like when Jesus speaks about his own word, what does that mean? Does the word of God have a word of its own? Or how can the “Son of Man” ascend to where HE was before, unless the “Word that was God” was already “the Son of Man” before he descended?
So you keep on posting your unscriptural drivel, and I'll believing my Lord when HE says that HE came down from heaven.
Yahshua Came Down From Heaven
By Voy Wilks
1990 – Revised 1993“For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him who sent me; …” (John 6:38, KJV).
I have searched the Scriptures at length and (assuming I overlooked none), have found that the Apostle John is the only witness which says Yahshua came down from heaven. John mentions this several times. They are listed here for your convenience:
John 3:13,31; 6:32-33, 38, 41-42, 50-51, 58, 62; 8:42; 16:27-28; 17:8
Matthew, Mark, Luke, Paul, Peter, James, and Jude make no mention that Yahshua “came down from heaven”.
Some believe that every major doctrine must have two witnesses. On this major point, however, we have only one witness who testifies that “Yahshua came down from heaven.” Such an astonishing bit of history as this should have several witnesses. But no. There is only one witness – the Apostle John. What are we to make of this surprising bit of information?
Actually, my view is, when biblical Scriptures are involved, only one witness is needed. However, something as outstanding as this would surely have been mentioned by other New Testament writers if this is to be accepted as literally true. From the list above, we see that no other New Testament writer records that “Yahshua came down from heaven.”
Figures of Speech
In reading through the book of Saint John, we discover that he indulges in many figures of speech; more than any other New Testament writer. Perhaps some will protest “But John wrote exact quotations from the Master's lips!” Perhaps this is true. If so, the other New Testament writers evidently gave the meaning of Yahshua's messages, rather than the exact quotations. Let us note an example:“… Yahshua stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water” (John 7:37,38 KJV).
Dropping the flowery figures of speech, the real message is: “One day my disciples will receive the Holy Spirit in a most powerful way” (John 3:39; Acts 2:4).
Compare John's report (above) with Lukes report on the same topic:
“If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children; how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those that ask him?” (Luke 11:13).
Misleading the Opposition
On many occasions Yahshua spoke in metaphors and in ambiguous parables to purposely mislead the opposition.“And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. … Therefore speak I unto them in parables; because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand …” (Mt. 13:10-15).
“… unto them that are without (cf. Rev. 22:15), all these things are done in parables: that seeing they may see, and ,not perceive; and hearing may hear, and not understand; lest at anytime they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them” (Mark 4:11,12).
Another example: “Yahshua said unto them, Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). He spoke of his death and resurrection, not the temple building (John 2:21,22).
On some occasions, even his disciples did not understand his parables, and asked him to explain (Mt. 13:36; Mark 8:14-17).
On other occasions Yahshua answered questions with questions; often, with questions they did not understand, or could not respond to (Mark 11:29; 12:34b). On still other occasions, he purposely made them angry, so that they wished to kill him (Mt. 23:17,19,24,25,33; Mark 7:19-23; John 7:32-46).
Yahshua Pre-existed (In the Father's Plan)
Evidently Yahshua pre-existed, but only in the sense that he was in the Father's glorious plans, and had been since the foundation of the world (John 17:5, 24), {See the paper dealing with this Scripture}. In the same sense, Yahshua was “slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8). Obviously, he was not literally and actually killed before the world was made, but it was in the Father's plan that the Messiah would be slain to redeem mankind.In a similar way and in the same sense, Yahshua “came down from heaven.” That is, he went out (according to plan) preaching by the authority of heaven; that is, by Yahweh's authority.
Since both the Father and the plans were in heaven, Yahshua did, in this sense, come down from heaven. Therefore, when he had completed all assignments planned for his first coming, he ascended to heaven where he was before” (in Yahweh's plan) (John 6:62). Remember, Yahshua spoke in parables for the express purpose of blinding the Jewish opposition (Mt. 13:10-15; Mark 4:11,12).
Every Good Gift Comes Down From Above
Yahshua “came down from heaven.” A similar statement reads as follows:“Every good gift and every perfect gift IS FROM ABOVE, and cometh down from the Father of lights, …” (James 1:17).
James spoke of spiritual gifts in particular, but this is true of everything, including the physical blessings we receive. Take the lowly potato: we dig it from the ground. However, if it were not for the “blessings which come down from above,” the ground would not produce the potato for our use. All good gifts come down from above, from the Father of lights. This truth can be expressed in any one, or all, of the following ways:
Gifts from above, Gifts from heaven
Blessings of heaven, Blessings from YahwehAs noted above, James spoke especially of spiritual blessings. Undoubtedly, our greatest spiritual
blessing is Yahshua, the Messiah. He was in the Father's plan, even before the world was made (Eph. 1:10; RSV; 1 Peter 1:20), therefore Yahshua's coming is a “good and perfect gift from above” (James 1:17). Just as the lowly potato appears in the ground as a gift from above, so Yahshua (born of a woman) appeared as a gift from above. Yahshua, as well as the potato, had ancestors, not a pre-existence, as indicated in the following Scriptures:David, “… being a prophet, and knowing that Yahweh had sworn with an oath to him, that of THE FRUIT OF HIS LOINS, according to the FLESH, he would raise up Messiah to sit on his [David's] throne; …” (Acts 2:30; Rev. 5:5; 22:16; Heb. 7:14; Jer. 33:20-22).
We have considered the blessings which come down from above. On some occasions evil also comes down from above – from Yahweh” (Micah 1:12). On this occasion Yahweh brought it about by the use of invading armies who took the people captive (Micah 1:6,16). No pre-existence was involved.
John's Baptism
Yahshua asked the opposition, “The baptism of John, whence was it? From heaven, or form men?” (Mt. 21:25; Mark 11:30; Luke 20:4).Obviously, John's baptism was “from heaven.” Metonymy is used here. “Heaven” an euphemism, an expression indicating the authority of heaven; an epithet designating Yahweh, the ruler in heaven. Yahweh approved and supported John, his preaching, his baptism, and his work. Just as the baptism of John came from heaven, so Yahshua came from heaven. Both John and Yahshua were approved (authorized) by Yahweh – “our Father who is in heaven” (Mt. 6:9).
Other Scriptures speak in a similar fashion, as is indicated by these references:
As opposed to earthly envy, sensual and devilish thoughts and conduct, “… the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits. …” (James 3:16,17).
“They set their mouth against the heavens, …” (Ps. 73:9).
“I have sinned against heaven …” (Luke 15:18,21).
The thought is, “wisdom from above,” and the “heaven(s): are euphemisms for Yahweh and his authority and his influence.
Even the expression, the “kingdom of heaven,” is revealed. The kingdom is not in heaven. Instead it was (and will be) on the earth. However, it is planned and authorized by him who is in heaven; Yahweh, the Most High El.
Conclusion
How can we be sure the above understanding is correct? We can be sure because Scriptures in the Old and New Testaments indicate the following evidences:There is only one Yahweh (Neh. 9:6; Ps. 83:18), therefore Yahshua was never a Yahweh. See the paper, “One Lone Yahweh.”
There is only one true El (Isa 43:10,11; John 17:3), therefore Yahshua was never an El.
There is only one true Eloah (Ps. 18:31; 114:4), therefore Yahshua was never an Eloah.
There is only one true Elohim (Isa. 45:5,6; 46:6), therefore Yahshua was never an Elohim. See the paper, “Elohim: Singular or Plural?”
True Deity does not die (Deut. 32:40; Dan. 12:7), therefore Yahshua was never Deity, because he died (Acts 3:15).
Yahshua was never an angel (Heb. 1:5,13, NEB), therefore Yahshua did not pre-exist as an angel.
The fleshly (physical) body comes first. Only later comes the spiritual body (1 Cor. 15:46). This speaks directly about Yahshua's person. Therefore Yahshua did not pre-exist as a spiritual being.
Yahshua was born of a woman (Gal. 4:4), therefore Yahshua was truly flesh and blood; a human being (Heb. 2:14).
Yahshua was the “fruit of David's loins” (Acts 2:30), therefore Yahshua was fully human – flesh and blood.
Yahshua had the same origin as his brethern (Heb. 2:11), therefore Yahshua, originally, was not Deity.
Man was created a little lower than the angels, therefore Yahshua was, originally, lower than the angels (Heb. 2:6-9).
Moses predicted that Yahweh would raise up from among his brethern a prophet “like unto me” (Deut. 18:15-19). If Yahshua was Deity in human form, he would not have been “like” Moses.
Yahshua spoke in parables to purposely mislead the opposition, therefore some of his statements must not be taken literally.
Yahshua purposely angered the opposition, therefore they developed a strong desire to kill him.
Only the Apostle John reported that Yahshua came down from heaven. If literally true, we would expect other writers to report this. Since they did not, we must except this as a figure of speech, indicating that Yahshua's approval and authority came down from heaven – from Yahweh above.
The baptism of John was also “from heaven.” Did John or his baptism pre-exist?
All good and perfect gifts “come down from above, from the Father of lights.” This includes the lowly potato as well as Yahshua the Nazarene.
Both Yahshua and the potato were here, not because they pre-existed, because both had ancestors.
Brethern, Scriptures indicate Yahshua existed, even before the world began, but only in Yahweh's glorious plan (Eph. 1:9, RSV). Since both Yahweh and his plan were in heaven, Yahshua “came down from heaven.” This statement is a figure of speech, indicating Yahshua's authority was from above; from Yahweh, the Most High El.
Come, Yahshua Messiah!
Note: We have more than 60 papers about the non-pre-existence of Yahshua. If interested, PLEASE ASK FOR THEM.
Also see:
Study 7: The Origin of Jesus
Digression 23: “I Came Down From Heaven”
http://www.christadelphians.com/bibleba….en.html“The Glory I Had With You Before The World Was”
http://frank4yahweh.tripod.com/BeforeTheWorldWas.htmlQuote (942767 @ April 22 2012,12:52) Hi Mike: I believe that the person on the horse described as faithful and true and the person that the scripture states that “his name is called the Word of God” is Jesus.
Fantastic Marty!Now tell me, if you can comprehend that the title “the Word of God” is used to refer to none other than the BEING/PERSON “Jesus Christ” in Rev 19:13, then why do you insist – WITHOUT ONE SHRED OF SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE – that the same title used in John 1:1, 1:14, Luke 1:1, and 1 John 1:1 can't ALSO be referring to none other than the BEING/PERSON “Jesus Christ”?
For crying out loud, Marty, this Word actually became flesh, was seen with human eyes, touched with human hands, and dwelled for a while on earth with the glory of God's only begotten Son. WHO ELSE IN THE UNIVERSE COULD IT BE?
Look Marty, as you already know (because you and I have done this exercise before), there is more than enough evidence to understand that the Word mentioned in John 1, Luke 1, and 1 John 1 is the SAME Word that is mentioned in Rev 19. And there is absolutly NO scripture in whole of the Bible that would CONTRADICT that understanding.
Granted, there are some scriptures that can be understood more than one way, but not ALL FIFTY OF THEM. And more often than not, you guys make a nonsensical mish-mash absurdity out of a completely understandable sentence in your effort to make the scriptures say what you want them to say.
This exercise has served its purpose. It has shown that, while you guys will never stop imagining a “just like the rest of us Jesus” (because that's the Jesus you WANT), you don't really have any solid scripture to refute or rebut the many that clearly teach of the pre-existence of Jesus. So feel free to keep on changing “the glory I had in your presence before the world began” to “the glory THE THOUGHT OF ME IN YOUR HEAD had in your presence before the world began” if it helps you to feel more empowered. As for me, I will believe my Lord when he says he came down from heaven.
Also, remember that the Jesus you guys have created of your own imaginations didn't sacrifice one single thing for us. Instead, your Jesus hit the jackpot of all jackpots. Your Jesus won the “God Lottery”. As if God picked a normal human being out of millions of them, and told that LUCKY one: “Suffer through one day of pain and death – things all men go through anyway – and I will give you eternal life at My own right hand, ruling over the entire heavens and earth with Me.”
Marty, wouldn't you JUMP at that opportunity? Wouldn't we ALL? So where's the “sacrifice”?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 23 2012,06:29) Hi FRank,
John is meat.
He offers food for the spiritual.
Most choke
Nick,You might want to perform a heimlich maneuver on Mike!
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ April 22 2012,13:27) “For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him who sent me; …” (John 6:38, KJV). I have searched the Scriptures at length and (assuming I overlooked none), have found that the Apostle John is the only witness which says Yahshua came down from heaven. John mentions this several times.
Well, at least old Roy understands that John clearly quotes Jesus as saying he came down from heaven, and would ascend to where he was before.But unlike those on this site, who try to substitute nonsense for these simple words (which, btw, the Jews to whom Jesus was speaking understood just fine), Roy would rather just do away with the entire gospel of John. Well, that's sure one way to get rid of the opposing doctrines, huh?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 23 2012,06:36) Quote (942767 @ April 22 2012,12:52) Hi Mike: I believe that the person on the horse described as faithful and true and the person that the scripture states that “his name is called the Word of God” is Jesus.
Fantastic Marty!Now tell me, if you can comprehend that the title “the Word of God” is used to refer to none other than the BEING/PERSON “Jesus Christ” in Rev 19:13, then why do you insist – WITHOUT ONE SHRED OF SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE – that the same title used in John 1:1, 1:14, Luke 1:1, and 1 John 1:1 can't ALSO be referring to none other than the BEING/PERSON “Jesus Christ”?
For crying out loud, Marty, this Word actually became flesh, was seen with human eyes, touched with human hands, and dwelled for a while on earth with the glory of God's only begotten Son. WHO ELSE IN THE UNIVERSE COULD IT BE?
Look Marty, as you already know (because you and I have done this exercise before), there is more than enough evidence to understand that the Word mentioned in John 1, Luke 1, and 1 John 1 is the SAME Word that is mentioned in Rev 19. And there is absolutly NO scripture in whole of the Bible that would CONTRADICT that understanding.
Granted, there are some scriptures that can be understood more than one way, but not ALL FIFTY OF THEM. And more often than not, you guys make a nonsensical mish-mash absurdity out of a completely understandable sentence in your effort to make the scriptures say what you want them to say.
This exercise has served its purpose. It has shown that, while you guys will never stop imagining a “just like the rest of us Jesus” (because that's the Jesus you WANT), you don't really have any solid scripture to refute or rebut the many that clearly teach of the pre-existence of Jesus. So feel free to keep on changing “the glory I had in your presence before the world began” to “the glory THE THOUGHT OF ME IN YOUR HEAD had in your presence before the world began” if it helps you to feel more empowered. As for me, I will believe my Lord when he says he came down from heaven.
Also, remember that the Jesus you guys have created of your own imaginations didn't sacrifice one single thing for us. Instead, your Jesus hit the jackpot of all jackpots. Your Jesus won the “God Lottery”. As if God picked a normal human being out of millions of them, and told that LUCKY one: “Suffer through one day of pain and death – things all men go through anyway – and I will give you eternal life at My own right hand, ruling over the entire heavens and earth with Me.”
Marty, wouldn't you JUMP at that opportunity? Wouldn't we ALL? So where's the “sacrifice”?
Mike,The name/title “The Word of Yahweh” is not used in reference to Yahshua Messiah in Yahchanan 1:1, 1:14, Lukyah 1:1, and 1 Yahchanan 1:1.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 23 2012,06:43) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ April 22 2012,13:27) “For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him who sent me; …” (John 6:38, KJV). I have searched the Scriptures at length and (assuming I overlooked none), have found that the Apostle John is the only witness which says Yahshua came down from heaven. John mentions this several times.
Well, at least old Roy understands that John clearly quotes Jesus as saying he came down from heaven, and would ascend to where he was before.But unlike those on this site, who try to substitute nonsense for these simple words (which, btw, the Jews to whom Jesus was speaking understood just fine), Roy would rather just do away with the entire gospel of John. Well, that's sure one way to get rid of the opposing doctrines, huh?
Who is Roy?Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ April 22 2012,13:51) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 23 2012,06:36) Also, remember that the Jesus you guys have created of your own imaginations didn't sacrifice one single thing for us. Instead, your Jesus hit the jackpot of all jackpots. Your Jesus won the “God Lottery”. As if God picked a normal human being out of millions of them, and told that LUCKY one: “Suffer through one day of pain and death – things all men go through anyway – and I will give you eternal life at My own right hand, ruling over the entire heavens and earth with Me.” Marty, wouldn't you JUMP at that opportunity? Wouldn't we ALL? So where's the “sacrifice”?
Mike,The name/title “The Word of Yahweh” is not used in reference to Yahshua Messiah in Yahchanan 1:1, 1:14, Lukyah 1:1, and 1 Yahchanan 1:1.
Frank,What did your Jesus sacrifice for us? Wouldn't you also JUMP at the chance to trade one day on a stake for eternity at God's right hand?
Where's the “sacrifice” in that?
Did Jesus Come Down from Heaven?
by Servetus the EvangelicalThe institutional church has always claimed that the Bible says Jesus preexisted as
God in heaven and came down to earth to become a man, called “the incarnation.”The
Nicene Creed says of Jesus, “For us men and our salvation he came down from heaven.”
The church also has claimed the incarnation is based on the Bible. Yet there is
nothing in the first three gospels of the New Testament (NT) to indicate this. In contrast,
the church has cited the Gospel of John as incontrovertible evidence of the incarnation
(cf. John 1.1, 14). Indeed, this gospel presents a flurry of texts which seem to proclaim
that Jesus preexisted and that he came down from heaven to become a man (1.15, 30;
3.13; 6.27-63; 8.58; 17.5, 24).
But should these Johannine texts be interpreted literally? In the 3rd century, church
father Clement of Alexandria referred to the Gospel of John as “the spiritual gospel,” and
scholars ever since have rightly endorsed this label. It is because the Johannine Jesus used
so many metaphors. The most well-known is when he told Nicodemus he needed to be
“born again,” and he thought Jesus meant a second physical birth (John 3.3). At the end
of Jesus’ ministry he told the Eleven, “I have spoken to you in figurative language; an
hour is coming when I will speak no more to you in figurative language but will tell you
plainly” (16.25; cf. 10.6). He explained his mission and the disciples replied, “Lo, now
You are speaking plainly, and are not using a figure of speech” (16.29). So, the Gospel of
John provides the ultimate reality—the spiritual meaning that lies behind Jesus’ words.
Forty times the Gospel of John says God “sent” Jesus or words to that effect. Such
language does not indicate sent from heaven but merely sent in the prophetic tradition,
that is, God sending someone to do a mission, as he did with John the Baptist (John 1.6).
Most of the supposedly preexistence passages in the Gospel of John describe Jesus as
having “come down” either “from heaven” or “from above.” Traditionalists (those who
believe Jesus is God) have interpreted these texts literally; yet the spiritual nature of this
gospel should caution us to undertake further examination. For example, Nicodemus did
not mean preexistence when he told Jesus, “You have come from God” (John 3.2).
Twice this gospel records that John the Baptist said Jesus “has a higher rank than I,
for He existed before me” (John 1.15, 30). These statements have been taken to infer that
Jesus preexisted, sincehe was born at least six months after John was (Luke 1.26, 36).
But some Bible versions translate the last clause, “for he was before me” (AV, NRSV, NIV),
meaning rank. And this is what John means when he twice says of Jesus, “He who comes
from above/heaven is above all” (3.31), meaning “over all.”
Also, the Johannine Jesus proclaimed, “no one has ascended into heaven, but He who
descended from heaven: the Son of Man” (John 3.13). Most scholars arbitrarily reverse
this ascending/descending order, so that the supposedly preexistent Jesus descended from
heaven at the incarnation and ascended after his resurrection. But the context demands
otherwise. Jesus tells Nicodemus he must be born “from above” with a spiritual birth
(John 3.3-5). Plus, Jesus as the Son of Man alludes in Daniel 7.13-14, in which this figure
ascends to God’s heavenly throne to receive a kingdom consisting of humans and then
presumably bringing it to earth (cf. Luke 19.11-12), thus an ascending/descending order.Many Christians think the foremost preexistence passage in the Gospel of John about
Jesus coming down from heaven is his lengthy Bread of Life discourse in John 6.25-65,
which contains lots of descent language. Yet this graphic picture is full of metaphors.
Jesus describes himself as “the (living) bread that came down out of heaven” (6.41, 51,
58). Even though he obviously does not mean he is literal bread, nearly all readers of this
gospel have thought that he meant it literally, thus inferring his personal preexistence and
incarnation. Yet Jesus also said in this discourse that people need to eat his flesh and
drink his blood, and if they do they will never hunger or thirst again but live forever (vv.
50-58). Many of Jesus’ hearers grumbled that these were difficult words (vv. 41, 60-61),
and many of his disciples no longer followed him because of it (v. 66). Yet Jesus had just
explained that he was speaking figuratively by saying, “the words that I have spoken to
you are spirit and are life” (v. 63). If the bread, flesh, blood, hunger, and thirst are strictly
metaphors intended spiritually and not literally, can we justify treating the only other idea
in this account any differently—Jesus coming down from heaven?
Later, Jesus said to his unbelieving Jewish interlocutors, “You are from below, I am
from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world” (John 8.23). He surely does not
mean he literally preexisted and came from heaven. If so, to be consistent he also would
have to mean his opponents literally came from below. So, in all such Johannine passages
Jesus does not indicate literal origin but spiritual reality. That is, he is associated with
God and heaven whereas they are associated with the devil and hell (cf. 8.44).
In Jesus’ high priestly prayer uttered prior to his capture and arrest, he prayed, “Now,
Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the
world was…. My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the
foundation of the world” (John 17.5, 24). This seems to indicate that Jesus preexisted in
heaven prior to creation, whenhe possessed a glory he apparently shared with God.
But Jesus could be referring to the Shekinah glory which accompanied the Israelites.
He could have meant that, in God’s mind and prior to creation, God loved his Son whom
he foreknew (cf. Ephesians 1.4; 1 Peter 1.20), for whom he predestined the Shekinah.
Indeed, Judaism taught that the Shekinah glory was predestined for the Messiah.
In sum, it seems that all language in the Gospel of John about Jesus preexisting and
coming down from heaven was intended metaphorically in this spiritual gospel.
SOURCEDid Jesus Empty Himself of Any Divine Attributes?
by Servetus the EvangelicalThe Apostle Paul wrote to the Christians at Philippi, exhorting them to be humble
and love one another (Philippians 2.1-4). Then he addedwhat all modern scholars insist
is a pre-existing hymn whose composer remains unknown. Paul introduces this hymn by
telling readers, “Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus” (v. 5).
Then he begins the hymn by saying, “who, although He existed in the form of God, did
not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form
of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men …” (vv. 6-7).
Philippians 2.6-11 has had a most profound impact on the history of Christology.
H.E. Todt says of it, “Christological doctrine has been developed in Protestantism mainly
with regard to the concepts expressed in Phil. 2. The synoptic texts were interpreted to
conform to this passage.” It should have been vice versa.
Consequently, Philippians 2.6-11 has been hotly debated among modern scholars.
N.T. Wright says the main reason is that it “is one of the most notoriously complex
passages” in all of Paul’s New Testament(NT) letters. Due to the necessary brevity of this
article, we will only be able to scratch the surface of this scholarly discussion.
Two contrasting interpretations of Philippians 2.6-11 have prevailed among scholars.
The traditional “incarnational” or “preexistent interpretation,” which still dominates to
the present, means that vv. 6-7 presents Jesus as personally existingin heaven prior to his
earthly life and being equal with Godthe Father. The “anthropological” or “human
interpretation,” which is gaining favor with scholars, means that vv. 6-8 refers only to
Jesus’ earthly life and therefore has nothing to do with preexistence or incarnation.
Those who adopt the preexistent interpretation of this Philippians 2 hymn view it in
three stages: preexistence in v. 6, incarnation in vv. 7-8, and heavenly exaltation in vv. 9-
11. They interpret “form of God” in v. 6 as Jesus having preexisted eternally as a distinct
hypostasis or Person, being the Logos of John 1.1-18, by possessing the same divine
nature as that of God the Father, which makeshim equal with the Father.
How one interprets the expression, “in the form of God” (Gr. en morphe theou),
largely determines the interpretation of the remainder of the hymn. This critical phrase is
difficult partly because, except for cognates, morphe (“form”) occurs only twice in the
Greek NT, both being here in vv. 6-7. In most Greek literature, morphemeans “outward
appearance,” that is, what can be perceived only by the senses. So, “form of God” seems
to refer to Jesus’ bodily existence rather than a pre-temporal, ontological preexistence.
Proponents of the human interpretation of Philippians 2.6-11 have searched the Old
Testament (OT) for links to this hymn as the key to understanding its author’s intended
meaning. Thus, they link Jesus existing “in the form of God” with Adam being made in
the “image (of God),” as in Genesis 1.27; 5.3. In support, Paul elsewhere describes Jesus
as God’s “image” (Greek eikon; 2 Corinthians 4.4; Col 1.15). Accordingly, the hymn
begins by saying Jesus was in the image of God, like Adam, called Adam Christology.
What does the hymn mean by saying that Jesus “did not regard equality with God a
thing to be grasped”? Scholars who adopt the preexistent interpretation usually insist it
means that prior to Jesus’ incarnation, as the Logos, he possessed “equality with God”
and relinquished it at the moment of incarnation. But if the Logos could have grasped at
equality with God, He did not possess it and thus could not have been equal with God.
Proponents of the human interpretation of this hymn link “equality with God” to
“like God” in Genesis 3.5. Recall that Adam sinned because Satan deceived Eve, saying
that if she ate the forbidden fruit, “you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” This lie
meansthey could attain “equality with God” regarding knowledge and wisdom (v. 6).
What does the hymn mean by saying that Jesus “emptied Himself”? Proponents of
the preexistent interpretation of the hymn have understood this mostly in one of two
ways, that at Jesus’ incarnation he divested himself of his relative divine attributes orhe
merely chose not to exercise some of them during his incarnation. These suggestions are
called Kenotic Christology because the root word for “emptied” in the Greek text is
kenosis. But either of these suggestions raises serious problems. A divesture of any of
these divine attributes—for example, omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence—
would have been necessary because they are incompatible with being human, yet such
divesture necessarily results in something less than full deity.
Some proponents of the human interpretation have linked “emptied Himself” (Gr.
heauton ekenosen) with “poured out Himself to death” (Heb. nephesho lamoot herah) in
Isaiah 53.12. Joachim Jeremias convincingly championed this background for the hymn.
He said of these words in Philippians 2.7, “The use of Is. 53:12 shows that the expression
heauton ekenosen implies the surrender of life, not the kenosis of the incarnation.”
Indeed. Paul introduced this hymn by saying, “Do nothing from selfishness or empty
conceit, but with humility of mind” (Philippians 2.3), which he says was Jesus’ attitude
(v. 5). Therefore, Paul likely understood this hymn to mean that Jesus emptied Himself of
self by submitting to God’s plan for his life. It is the cross of Christ, not incarnation,
which is the epitome of Jesus’ self-denial depicted in the NT. And it is only in this sense,
rather than incarnation, that Paul can legitimately set forth an example for his readers to
follow. Therefore, Jesus did not deny himself by laying aside or suppressing certain
divine attributes at his birth, but by doing acts of moral character throughout his life that
culminated in death on a cross, resulting in salvation for all those who believe in him.
In my book, The Restitution of Jesus Christ, I devote 21 pages to the interpretation of
Philippians 2.5-11. In doing so, I cite 45 scholars and their works plus 4 church fathers.
SOURCEQuote (Frank4YAHWEH @ April 22 2012,14:06) In Jesus’ high priestly prayer uttered prior to his capture and arrest, he prayed, “Now,
Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the
world was…. My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the
foundation of the world” (John 17.5, 24).This seems to indicate that Jesus preexisted in
heaven prior to creation, whenhe possessed a glory he apparently shared with God.
It sure does seem that way. And there is no SCRIPTURAL reason to NOT understand it that way – only PERSONAL, SELF-SERVING reasons.Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ April 22 2012,14:06) But Jesus could be referring to the Shekinah glory which accompanied the Israelites.
He could have meant that, in God’s mind and prior to creation, God loved his Son whom
he foreknew (cf. Ephesians 1.4; 1 Peter 1.20), for whom he predestined the Shekinah.And there you have the basis for ALL non-preexistent “proofs”: “Well, it sure SEEMS TO SAY THIS, but, I guess if we look at it hard enough with our 'we don't WANT Jesus to have pre-existed' eyes, we COULD imagine that it refers to something completely different and nonsensical.”
Once again Frank, if it was a glory God had WAITING FOR JESUS, then the words “the glory I HAD” do not fit.
Best to go back to what IT SEEMED to be saying in the first place, and let your PERSONAL WISHES go by the wayside.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
